speed camera submissions

[jcbboy]

I also have sent them in in the past had the emails and still no follow up i went on the notorius wakefield road on the 11th of november evening 8 cameras active only one came up to long a delay from notification to active on the database. also notified of a 30mph active a month ago the postion of one and updated again today. there is one on the map about o.5 miles further on but not this one.Could have lost my licence had i not been a local knowing that they where all up.Yes the road is a mess with cameras, safer maybe due to lack of use now all the traffic is using alternative country lanes including artics but contacting several town council and no reply well thats democracy.

[mikealder]

Are you still using the Garmin Nuvi? if so it might not be offering warnings if your speed is below the speed limit, also can you offer more information on the location such as town/ village etc, just a road name isn't much use when trying to locate it in the UK - Mike

[Darren]

As Mike has said, all but impossible to decipher where you are referring to. Let us know where and we can investigate.

Also useful to know what device you have.

However, I've looked up your record and jcboy has no subscription and we have no submissions recorded under your user-name.

Do you perhaps have a subscription under a different user-name? I have found one similar but that expired in September 09.

Help us and we'll help you!
_________________
Darren Griffin

[DennisN]

[Darren]

Oops, my apologies! That's what comes of replying in the early morning! Sorry jcbboy, I mis-read your forum name.
_________________
Darren Griffin

[MaFt]

presumably referring to crazy string of cameras recently added to wakefield road - rob posted about it as a front page news item here at PGPSW

these cameras have now all been checked and will be in the next database release.

MaFt

[jcbboy]

Thanks for realising I am a member and have been for some years, I have received emails confirming my submissions, and was there an answer to my question. What is the time from receiving a submission to you adding it to the database. As I said was it 7 out of 8 activated on wakefield road Huddersfield only one on database. I was travelling just under and within one mph below limit I have a Garmin 710 and is set to 5mph below limit to alert. The submission I made was to one not on database some weeks ago and again up to half a mile from one registering.

[DennisN]

[Andy_P]

[MaFt]

if i get the time / chance to get a screen grab of the submissions for those cameras i'll post it up and you can see what i had to work with!

MaFt

[MaFt]

ok, i'm spoiling you and have spent far too much time on this than i normally would! however, it serves dual purpose for another post as well!

please see this image:

http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/temp/MaFt/wakeyroad.jpg

the red circles are 'patches' of submission where the submitter is insistent that there is a camera there (hence why they submitted it!).

the 4 that say 'yes' are actual camera sites. the remaining 6 are not. this is why we verify and don't rely on low numbers of submissions to perfect the location! had we just added al of them then we would have 10 cameras marked on this stretch! then we would have had lots of complaints...!!

MaFt[/url]

[BigPerk]

If I understand this correctly, about unconfirmed sites not being shown on the main database, why NOT show them, with some kind of clear 'unconfirmed' marker? This would (a) warn people early of possible new sites, and (b) provide a more positive indication for others to confirm/deny for the original submitter.

Just a thought.
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360)

[DennisN]

That was the theory behind the pMobile cameras, so we have hundreds of "possible" mobile sites littering the database! And I'm glad to be aware that the question of other pCamera publications has been firmly discounted by Darren.

Have another look at MaFt's link above and consider - whilst he says it would have resulted in ten sites for only four actuals, if you look closer, the blue and black blobs are a heck of a lot more.

Fixed cameras (and specs are fixed even when they are fixed only temporarily) are easy to verify and will get into the database relatively quickly if it's a well-trafficked road, because a Verifier will be along in the not too distant future. In the meantime, everybody who reports a specs camera will be adding weight of submissions clusters towards acceptance of a site without a Verifier's visit.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!

[BigPerk]

I take your point about pmobiles DennisN, but can't tell if that's what these cameras are - I guess the policy of dropping them after a few months (perhaps LESS than 6?) should take care of them.

For 'fixed' (eg specs or really static) cameras, I don't see quite the same problem as you describe, and some possible use - DO they get verified quickly, or would there be at least some benefit in showing them, and letting people see whether they are there or not (and submit if they wish to), especially on roads which may not be that well trafficked (and so more likely to catch people unawares?)?
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360)

[M8TJT]

But with 10+ alerts for four fairly obvious fixed cams, at least 1 person (perhaps a lot more) is going to object to all the false alarms for non existent cams and spread the word that our data is rubbish At least with pMobiles the user has to deliberately add them and presumably will be aware of the consequences of doing so

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!